Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-05-17 11:45:53 +0100, Dave Fawthrop
said:

On Thu, 17 May 2007 10:32:03 GMT, Stuart Noble
wrote:

wrote:
|! How do you feel about this being put on the wiki? Could be useful
|! information I think.


|!
|!The reality is that nobody cares, and nobody wants to read anything
more
|!than one sentence. I'm going to fit a solar panel to the the top of my
|!4x4 and leave it at that.

The reality is that owners of gas guzzling 4*4s care nothing about the
planet, or the environment, only themselves.

What a lot of nonsense. This really is media hype for the gullible.

It is the pattern of use which matters, which, in summary, was TNP's
original point.

I have two Land Rovers. They are useful for the things that I want to
do and I like them. The amount of use is quite small, with neither
exceeding 4000km per annum and is considerably less than the average.




Most people *here* would find the information interesting.

Most people would be happy to make small changes to their houses/lives to
save the planet.

Illogical statement. More gullibility.


It would only cost 0.12% of GDP every year, which is
peanuts.


As would be the outcome.


FWIW I have been insulating my house, to well above the then standards
for
more than 40 years. Every improvement I have made has made money in the
long run.

Given infinite time, almost anything can do that.



But, to go back to the original point, it is indeed surprising that
*any* thickness of insulation makes a huge difference. The problem is
the lack of any material that you can stick on the wall and decorate. I
lived in a house with polystyrene lined walls 40 years ago. Cheap and
easy, but so vulnerable to knocks that it wasn't practical. Even then
people were lining their walls with vinyl cushion floor. I lined an
exposed room with cork in the 70s. Difficult to believe there aren't
better solutions out there now.